Latest news with #CleanAirAct
Telegraph
9 hours ago
- Automotive
- Telegraph
America is scrapping green restrictions on cars. It'll leave Europe in the dust
In a move that has sent shockwaves through the environmental policy world, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to rescind greenhouse gas emissions standards for vehicles under the Clean Air Act. This is not merely a regulatory rollback, but a fundamental rethinking of the legal and scientific basis for environmental regulation in America. An accompanying climate assessment report from the US Department of Energy provides the scientific rationale for the rollback. It will make for uncomfortable reading for those who think that green policy should be based on ideology rather than a clear-headed assessment of the facts, but it is a vital document for bringing clarity to a subject often clouded by dogma. 'Climate change is real, and it deserves attention,' writes the Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, in the foreword. 'But it is not the greatest threat facing humanity. That distinction belongs to global energy poverty.' Indeed, the report concludes that 'there is evidence that scenarios widely-used in the impacts literature have overstated observed and likely future emission trends', and that projections of future warming had been 'exaggerated'. It also finds that 'excessively aggressive mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial' in economic terms. The implications are profound. If adopted, the EPA's proposal would eliminate federal greenhouse gas standards for a vast swathe of the transportation sector, which is responsible for 28 per cent of America's total greenhouse gas emissions. For years, transport has been the linchpin of green regulation. If the justification for regulating greenhouse gases from vehicles collapses, the rationale for regulating other sectors, such as power plants, becomes even weaker. It would also create an acute dilemma for the UK and the EU. If America repeals greenhouse gas standards for cars, Europe's transport system will become markedly more expensive and at a competitive disadvantage. While consumers in the UK and EU continue to endure electric vehicle mandates and ultra-low emissions zones, American families would be free to drive the vehicle best-suited to their needs. The move is far more significant than just a change to vehicle emissions standards, however. It's a direct challenge to the fundamental legal justification for much environmental policy in the US: the so-called 'Endangerment Finding'. This stemmed from a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, which interpreted the Clean Air Act as giving the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gases if the agency judged that those gases endangered the public. In 2009, the EPA concluded that CO₂ indeed endangered public health, triggering an avalanche of new regulations. The EPA is now arguing in its proposed rule that the 1970 Clean Air Act 'does not authorise the EPA to prescribe emission standards to address global climate change concerns;' that 'the EPA unreasonably analysed the scientific record and because developments cast significant doubt on the reliability of the findings;' and that 'no requisite technology for vehicle and engine emission control can address the global climate change concerns identified in the findings without risking greater harms to public health and welfare'. Critics will howl, but the EPA's reasoning is both legally sound and scientifically overdue. The EPA's new approach is based on recent Supreme Court rulings, notably West Virginia v EPA and Loper Bright, which have emphasised the need for clear congressional mandates for green regulations. The Clean Air Act was never designed to regulate carbon dioxide. Yet in Massachusetts v EPA, the Supreme Court shoehorned CO₂ into the definition of a 'pollutant'. The EPA is now questioning whether that decision should continue to serve as the foundation for sweeping climate regulation. As the Energy Secretary has also made clear, this is not climate denialism. It is climate realism. The EPA's proposal is grounded in a sober assessment of the science, as well as rational examination of the costs of green regulation relative to the potential advantages. Indeed, it cannot be ignored that moderate warming may bring some tangible benefits, such as fewer cold-related deaths, longer growing seasons, and improved agricultural yields. The social cost of carbon, a metric often used to justify costly regulations, is built on speculative assumptions and fails as a serious policy tool. And what of the climate effect of rescinding these vehicle emissions standards? It is likely to be negligible in global terms. Greenhouse gas standards raise the cost of transport and vehicles, hitting families and businesses alike. The EPA will take public comments for 45 days after the proposal is published in the Federal Register. It deserves a fair hearing and support from those who believe that environmental policy should be rooted in law, science, and realism, not in ideology.
Daily Mirror
10 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mirror
6 unhinged Trump moments as he leaves UK singer feeling 'sick' with weird video
(Image: Anadolu via Getty Images) If I were Donald Trump, I'd have stayed in bed today and slept off the jetlag. He's back in Washington after a nice relaxing trip to Scotland, where he played a lot of golf, signed a trillion dollar trade deal with the EU and met Keir Starmer - costing UK taxpayers tens of millions to police and protect his golf courses. He managed to make even more news on Air Force One last night, giving more details about his falling out with Jeffrey Epstein. He's done a bunch of posting on his Truth Social account - including some which will probably make India a bit nervous. And this morning, his White House has upset a genuine national treasure. Here's everything that went on in Trump World in the last 24 hours that you need to know about. The official White House Twitter account posted this video, which pastiches UK Jet2 holidays ads for some reason. The video juxtaposes footage of people being deported from the US with the well-known Jet2 TV ad, featuring Jess Glynne singing "Hold My Hand". Content cannot be displayed without consent Ms Glynne is not amused. She posted a response, saying: "This post honestly makes me sick. My music is about love, unity and spreading positivity - never about division or hate. Because a day can't go by in Trump World where there isn't talk of the US President pardoning a convicted sex offender, an administration source tells Deadline that "serious consideration" is being given to pardoning Sean "Diddy" Combs. Combs, previously known as Puff Daddy, is facing up to ten years behind bars on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. He's been denied bail and remains in prison pending his sentence. Given how his supporters feel about high-profile sex offenders, handing him a pardon would certainly be a ...choice. The Trump administration is moving to scrap the scientific finding that provides the basis for most US action to cut emissions and fight climate change. It would scrap the Environment Protection Agency's 2009 declaration that determined carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. The so-called "endangerment finding" is the legal underpinning of a host of climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources that are heating the planet. Repealing the finding "will be the largest deregulatory action in the history of America," EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said yesterday. "There are people who, in the name of climate change, are willing to bankrupt the country," Zeldin said on the conservative "Ruthless" podcast. "They created this endangerment finding and then they are able to put all these regulations on vehicles, on airplanes, on stationary sources, to basically regulate out of existence, in many cases, a lot of segments of our economy. And it cost Americans a lot of money." The EPA proposal must go though a lengthy review process, including public comment, before it is finalised, likely next year. Environmental groups are likely to challenge the rule change in court. Donald Trump has claimed Jeffrey Epstein "stole" his most well-known victim from him. The US President described for the first time during his trip to Scotland on Monday the events that led to his falling out with former friend Epstein. He told reporters during a Q&A session with Keir Starmer that the bust-up had been caused by Epstein doing something "inappropriate" - namely, poaching staff from him. Trump said he'd told him not to do it once, but that Epstein had repeated the behaviour, and so he'd ordered him to stay away from his Mar A Lago club in Florida's Palm Beach. Content cannot be displayed without consent As the Mirror noted the same day, Epstein's most well known victim, Virginia Giuffre, was allegedly 'hired' by Ghislaine Maxwell for Epstein while she was working in Trump's spa at Mar A Lago. Aboard Air Force One last night, Trump said he was upset that Epstein was "taking people who worked for me." The women, he said, were "taken out of the spa, hired by him - in other words, gone." "I said, listen, we don't want you taking our people," Trump said. When it happened again, Trump said he banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago. Asked if Giuffre was one of the employees poached by Epstein, he demurred but then said "he stole her." The White House originally said Trump banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago because he was acting like a "creep." Trump announced on Truth Social this morning that India is "our friend" but its "tariffs are far too high" on US goods. He threatened to impose a 25% tariff on goods from India, plus an additional "penalty" because they still buy Russian oil. The threat comes after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited the White House in February, not long after Trump took office - and promised to start buying American oil and gas. But months later, the outlines of a trade deal haven't been finalised. As the world attempts to keep up with Trump's antics, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond. We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. CLICK HERE TO JOIN The federal grand juries that indicted Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell on sex trafficking charges didn't hear evidence from any of Epstein's victims, according to Justice Department officials. Trump has ordered the release of evidence presented to the grand jury - which decides whether a prosecution should go ahead. There had been concerns that releasing the documents would be detrimental to survivors. But according to documents filed in court last night, there were only two witnesses - and both of them were law enforcement officers. While the memo didn't detail what was in the grand jury testimony, it dampened expectations that the transcripts would contain new revelations, saying that "certain aspects and subject matters" contained in them became public during Maxwell's trial in 2021 and that other details have been made public through many years of civil lawsuits filed by victims. Trump ordered the release of the evidence after he faced a huge backlash for failing to publish the files held by the FBI relating to the investigation. We don't know what's in the transcripts, but it seems unlikely his angry supporters will be satisfied by them. BLUESKY: Follow our Mirror Politics account on Bluesky here. And follow our Mirror Politics team here - Lizzy Buchan, Mikey Smith, Kevin Maguire, Sophie Huskisson, Dave Burke and Ashley Cowburn. POLITICS WHATSAPP: Be first to get the biggest bombshells and breaking news by joining our Politics WhatsApp group here. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you want to leave our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. NEWSLETTER: Or sign up here to the Mirror's Politics newsletter for all the best exclusives and opinions straight to your inbox. PODCAST: And listen to our exciting new political podcast The Division Bell, hosted by the Mirror and the Express every Thursday.
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Automotive
- Yahoo
US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed ending rules that address the contribution of motor vehicles to climate change. In a statement, the EPA said that its proposal would 'repeal all resulting greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines, thereby reinstating consumer choice and giving Americans the ability to purchase a safe and affordable car for their family while decreasing the cost of living on all products that trucks deliver'. Transportation is the largest source of direct greenhouse gas emissions in the US and for years the EPA has pushed vehicle makers in the US to reduce their contribution with steps that have included strict tailpipe standards and target a big transition to EVs and plug-in hybrids by 2030. In his presidential election campaign, Donald Trump pledged to roll back 'electric vehicle mandates' and boost the oil and gas industry. He framed his policies as about restoring consumer choice. They were also supported by the oil and gas industry and climate change sceptics, as well as parts of the US auto industry who have said tailpipe standards are too strict and costly to meet. The EPA's 'endangerment finding' in 2009 determined that CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions are a form of air pollution that the agency can regulate under the Clean Air Act, because climate change harms human health. The EPA's latest proposal would revoke the endangerment finding, seen by many as a cornerstone of US federal rules designed to tackle multiple sources of greenhouse gases – such as motor vehicles. Although CAFE standards remain in place, the US Department of Transport is reviewing them and Congress has already voted not to enforce big fines for vehicle manufacturer non-compliance. It has also voted to end the State of California's so-called 'EPA waiver' that meant it adopted tougher greenhouse gas policies than federal rules. The Trump administration has also scrapped consumer EV tax credits. 'With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end sixteen years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,' said EPA Administrator Zeldin. 'In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year. We heard loud and clear the concern that EPA's GHG emissions standards themselves, not carbon dioxide which the Finding never assessed independently, was the real threat to Americans' livelihoods. If finalized, rescinding the Endangerment Finding and resulting regulations would end $1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.' 'Thanks to President Trump's leadership, America is returning to free and open dialogue around climate and energy policy - driving the focus back to following the data,' said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. 'Today's announcement is a monumental step toward returning to commonsense policies that expand access to affordable, reliable, secure energy and improve quality of life for all Americans.' Administrator Zeldin also announced the agency would reconsider the Model Year 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles regulation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles. "US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles" was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
USA Today
15 hours ago
- Climate
- USA Today
Tsunami waves reach US coast
Good morning!🙋🏼♀️ I'm Nicole Fallert. Time to cringe to a new "The Summer I Turned Pretty" episode. Tsunami waves reach Hawaii and the West Coast hours after magnitude 8.8 earthquake U.S. authorities remain vigilant Wednesday morning of wave heights, as well as strong or hazardous currents, after tsunami advisories were triggered across the Pacific, Alaska and the entire U.S. West Coast. More updates: The waves began arriving in Hawaii after 7 p.m. local time after one of the strongest earthquakes in recorded history, a magnitude 8.8 temblor, struck Tuesday off Russia's Kamchatka Peninsula. The EPA just made the largest deregulatory action in US history The Environmental Protection Agency will rescind the long-standing finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, as well as tailpipe emission standards for vehicles. This means wiping out two decades of regulation aimed at reducing carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases from cars, power plants, oil production and other sources. President Donald Trump's pick to run the EPA Lee Zeldin will announce the proposal Tuesday. If finalized, this action will devastate the EPA's ability to carry out its primary authority to limit climate pollution under the federal Clean Air Act. More news to know now What's the weather today? Check your local forecast here. New York City shooter puts focus on NFL's troubling history with CTE The mass shooting in New York has once again put the spotlight on the National Football League's troubling history with how the league deals with head trauma and, more recently, the links with playing football and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a degenerative brain disease linked to repeated blows to the head. New York police say Shane Tamura, a 27-year-old Las Vegas resident who played high school football in the Los Angeles area, killed four people, including a New York City police officer, before turning the gun on himself. Mayor Eric Adams said Tamura targeted the league's headquarters in New York, leaving a note claiming he had CTE. Trump wants lower interest rates. Will the Fed make cuts? All eyes will be on the Federal Reserve's post-meeting statement Tuesday to see if there are signs of an impending interest rate cut in September. The Fed has kept its key interest rate steady since late 2024, despite monthslong pressure from President Donald Trump to make cuts. While Trump has floated the idea of firing Fed chair Jerome Powell, the president on July 24 backed off his threats following a visit to the Fed's headquarters. Trump's ire stems from the central bank's decision to wait and see how tariffs impact prices before adjusting rates. Today's talkers Crack open a cold one with USA TODAY From dive bars to hidden speakeasies, swanky cocktail lounges to beachfront watering holes, the best bars tell a story — and often serve up something tasty to go with your drink. USA TODAY's Bars of the Year 2025 are the places where locals and visitors alike gather for good conversation, warm vibes and a little slice of the city's character – whether that means savoring a Rusty Nail aboard a simulated flight in Phoenix, chasing an Orange Crush down the beach in Delaware or pairing a salty margarita with a deep-fried hot dog at a Florida dockside bar. Check out the spots chosen by USA TODAY Network journalists who know their hometown haunts inside and out. Photo of the day: This kid from America From New Hope, Pennsylvania, to Kawasaki, Japan: Zach Peckman, 16, is representing the best of American jump rope at the World Jump Rope Championships in Japan this week. His events are all about speed, such as the 30-second and 3-minute sprints where some athletes hit more than seven jumps per second. To keep rhythm during competition, Peckman listens to a sped-up version of Kim Wilde's 'Kids in America' — we'll be listening in support, too. Nicole Fallert is a newsletter writer at USA TODAY, sign up for the email here. Want to send Nicole a note? Shoot her an email at NFallert@
New York Times
17 hours ago
- Health
- New York Times
We Study Climate Change. It Endangers You and Your Children.
We study the effects of climate change on people. We know, from the best available science, that climate change will endanger the health and livelihood of most Americans alive today. After a long and sweeping review, the U.S. government came to a similar conclusion in 2009, when the federal Environmental Protection Agency issued a so-called endangerment finding — a move that signaled a high level of government confidence in the data it was reviewing. The finding established that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that cause climate change are harmful pollutants. In turn, this meant that these gases could be regulated by the Clean Air Act, empowering the E.P.A. to issue regulations on emissions of these gases from cars, trucks, power plants and other sources, backed by stronger science. Reasonable people will disagree about how best to address climate change. The purpose of America's endangerment findings is to acknowledge that a hazard exists so that the government can protect Americans from it. Think of the finding like car headlights in the dark, helping us see dangers ahead and avoid them. The Trump administration this week took the first step to overturn the finding, by issuing a proposal that claims that the rule is scientifically and legally invalid, as well as unjustifiably costly. After a comment period, the administration could try to finalize the withdrawal of the finding next year. The consequence — and likely goal — of the administration's gamble, if it succeeds against inevitable legal challenges, will be to begin unraveling several regulations that have begun to make a dent in America's contribution to climate change and the hazards it creates. A key element of the administration's proposal is to redefine what it means for air pollution to cause harm. If a pollutant causes climate change, it would no longer count as hurting us. This runs counter to both basic logic and a growing mountain of science documenting direct harms from greenhouse gas emissions via climate change. Why are we so confident in the dangers ahead? Humans are highly adaptable and Americans are particularly so, but the data and evidence indicate that climate change will cause many Americans to die earlier than they otherwise would. High temperatures will kill Americans by stressing underlying conditions, such as heart disease. We expect that intensifying hurricanes, more frequent floods and smoke from more frequent forest fires together will most likely kill millions of Americans in the coming century. In addition to intensifying natural threats, climate change will make households and communities in America more dangerous for their inhabitants. Environmental conditions affect our bodies and minds, particularly how we make decisions and turn to violence. Higher temperatures are associated with more miscarriages and more domestic violence. While perhaps surprising, the link between rape and temperature is one of the strongest findings in our field. We fear that additional heat from climate change will lead to more suicides, murders and assaults. Climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of acute disasters, such as the recent devastating fires in Maui, Los Angeles and Paradise, Calif.; the floods in Texas; and the hurricane damage in Puerto Rico and North Carolina. As health insurance and property insurance become more expensive or access to coverage disappears, coping with these risks will be increasingly expensive. Taxpayers will bear many additional costs when uninsured losses fall to public social safety net programs. Farmers are expected to suffer some of the most serious losses to climate change. Annual crop losses throughout much of the Corn Belt are projected to be significant. Agricultural innovation, which we once expected to compensate for these losses, appears more sluggish than predicted. Losing access to water resources will drive up costs for farmers, and climate change will hurt the value of American farmland. The Trump administration argues that slowing greenhouse gas emissions has harmed the economy and impedes business — but climate change will, too, only more so. Economic growth will slow, food prices will very likely rise, and vast tracts of American real estate will lose value. We predict that workers will become less productive, less happy and more prone to safety errors. Demands on public services will increase while the cost of servicing new debt will probably rise. In contrast, climate change is expected to generally enhance some economic opportunities for Russia and Canada. Parents may feel a growing urgency to warn their children about climate change, since it will reduce their opportunities in life. Exposure to high temperatures in school or regional disasters lowers their ability to learn and perform well on exams. Rising temperatures at home and other climate changes worsen sleep, exercise, mental health and happiness. Learning about the consequences of climate change can feel overwhelming and scary, like staring over the edge of a cliff. Unlike our ancestors who relied on stars, tea leaves and fortune tellers to try to peer into the future, we have data and scientific tools that empower us to understand the results of the different choices in front of us. Previously, the E.P.A. led the world in bringing the best available science to climate policy discussions. Overturning the endangerment finding would bench the agency right when we need the E.P.A.'s tools the most. There are opportunities to push back. The public can comment on the administration's proposal. And when legal challenges to this rollback end up in federal court, judges should recognize the overwhelming evidence on the dangers of greenhouse gases to Americans. Solomon Hsiang and Marshall Burke teach at the Doerr School of Sustainability at Stanford University. The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@ Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.
